1 Wednesday, 30 September 2009
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 --- Upon commencing at 9.10 a.m.
5 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Your Honours. Good morning
6 everyone in and around the courtroom. This is case IT-08-91-T, the
7 Prosecutor versus Mico Stanisic and Stojan Zupljanin.
8 JUDGE HALL
9 I know that last week we'd indicated that it probably wouldn't be
10 necessary for some small saving in terms of administrative economy to
11 take the appearances each day, but since then there's been -- I've been
12 advised that for the consistent accuracy of the transcript that I should
13 ask for the appearances each -- at the beginning of each day. So if I
14 may have the appearances, please.
15 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honours. I'm Thomas Hannis on
16 behalf of the Office of the Prosecutor. To my right is trial attorney
17 Belinda Pidwell. From my near left to my far left are Alexis Demirdjian,
18 legal officer; Gramsci Di Fazio, trial attorney; and our case manager,
19 Crispian Smith. Thank you.
20 JUDGE HALL
21 MR. ZECEVIC: Good morning Your Honours, Zecevic, Slobodan for
22 Stanisic Defence. With me is Mr. Cvijetic, on my right; and on my left,
23 Mr. O'Sullivan. Thank you very much.
24 JUDGE HALL
25 MR. PANTELIC: Good morning, Your Honours. I'm Igor Pantelic for
1 Mr. Zupljanin. Next to me is my colleague co-counsel Mr. Dragan Krkovic.
2 On my left is our legal assistant, attorney-at-law Brent Hicks; and next
3 to him is Mr. Eric Tully, our case manager. Thank you.
4 JUDGE HALL
5 Before we -- before we begin, there is something to which the
6 Chamber would wish to draw the attention of the parties so that you may
7 think about it and we will return to you for your views on our proposals
8 at some point in the course of the next few days. That is that the trial
9 will not sit on the 16th of October. And the Chamber proposes that to
10 make up for this we will sit -- we will have extended hours on the 19th,
11 20th, and 21st. So if counsel could consider that, and we would return
12 to inquire as to what views you have on the Chamber's proposal to make up
13 that difference. Thank you.
14 Judge Harhoff.
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you. The Chamber has dealt with the
16 Defence motion for the delay of testimony of Witness ST-019, and the
17 Chamber saw fit to render an oral decision which is as follows:
18 On 25th September, the Defence filed a joint motion seeking that
19 the testimony of ST-019 be delayed by two months due to the Prosecution's
20 disclosure on 23rd September of 29 documents totaling around 600 pages.
21 The Prosecution responded on 28 September, and on the same date the
22 Defence jointly sought leave to reply to the Prosecution's response, and
23 they did file a reply.
24 The Trial Chamber grants the Defence leave to file this reply.
25 As a preliminary matter, the Trial Chamber notes that there are
1 arguments in the Defence reply which the Defence could - and therefore
2 should - have made in the Motion itself. The Chamber reminds the parties
3 of their duty to bring all relevant arguments in motions. The
4 alternative under Rule 126 bis is to file a reply with the leave of the
5 Trial Chamber is not to be used to supplement arguments that the party
6 forgot to include in its first original motion. This holds equally true
7 in the situation such as the present where the parties have elected to
8 enter into a quick exchange of submissions.
9 The Trial Chamber notes the Prosecution's submission that it does
10 not seek to rely on the 29 documents or to have them admitted into
11 evidence and that the documents only contain references in passing by
12 other persons to the witness himself, ST-019.
13 While the material is disclosed pursuant to a request by the
14 Defence, it is true, as the Defence argues, that the Prosecution disclose
15 the documents very close to the testimony of ST-019. Nevertheless, in
16 the circumstances of the present case, the Trial Chamber cannot find that
17 the Prosecution has acted in breach of its obligation, nor does the
18 Chamber find that the Defence is suffering any prejudice from hearing 019
19 today. Unless the documents for some reason are not included in the
21 documents. The Defence is also free to call the witness to testify for
22 the Defence if the material does turn out to have any significance. The
23 joint Defence motion, therefore, is denied.
24 Thank you.
25 JUDGE HALL
2 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, Mr. Di Fazio will be leading the first
3 witness, ST-19.
4 JUDGE HARHOFF: Can I, just before we bring in the witness, put a
5 question. It appears that he's to testify in closed session. Is that
7 MR. DI FAZIO: That's correct, Your Honours.
8 JUDGE HARHOFF: And would it make any sense to just check whether
9 he still wants that, because the order for closed testimony was rendered
10 a very long time ago in a situation where he was employed in a public
11 service, and I understand that this is no longer the case. So we were
12 just wondering whether we could perhaps relax the protective measures a
14 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, of course the Prosecution has no problem
15 with the Trial Chamber making those inquiries if you wish to. However, I
16 understand that he still remains and lives in an area of Bosnia
17 predominantly of Serb ethnicity and he does hold concerns, I understand,
18 that continue to this day. So unless there's been a substantial change
19 in the circumstances that I'm not aware of and that he hasn't raised with
20 me, the protective measures should continue. But of course if the
21 Trial Chamber wants to raise it with him directly, then the Prosecution
22 has no objection to that whatsoever.
23 JUDGE HARHOFF: We thought it might be worthwhile to raise with
24 him at least perhaps not to abolish altogether the protective measures
25 but just to relax them a bit so we could perhaps do --
1 MR. DI FAZIO: Well, I see no impediment, no reason why you
2 shouldn't make that inquiry if the Trial Chamber feels that it should.
3 Could we at least start that inquiry, though, in closed session?
4 JUDGE HARHOFF: Absolutely. Thank you.
5 MR. DI FAZIO: In that case, if Your Honours please, I'll call
6 Witness ST-19.
7 JUDGE HALL
8 [Closed session]
11 Pages 521-527 redacted. Closed session.
15 [Open session]
16 THE REGISTRAR: Open session, Your Honours.
17 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. If Your Honours please, as a brief
18 introduction to this witness, he testified in the past and, and he
19 testified basically about events in Kotor Varos and his incarceration in
20 Kotor Varos and events preceding the war and in the early part of the war
21 in Kotor Varos, and that's the only introduction that I propose to give
22 of his past testimony.
23 Q. Witness ST-19, did you testify at this Tribunal on the 16th and
24 17th of June 2003 in the Brdjanin case?
25 A. Yes, I did.
1 Q. And yesterday were you provided with an opportunity to listen to
2 an audio file of your testimony in that case?
3 A. Yes, I did have that opportunity, and I did listen to it.
4 Q. And were you able to hear the questions of counsel and the
5 answers that you gave to those questions?
6 A. Yes. I listened to it in its entirety. I heard the questions
7 from the Prosecutor and also questions from the Defence and my answers to
8 the questions put.
9 Q. And if you were to be examined on those same topics again today,
10 would you provide that same testimony?
11 A. Yes. My testimony would be identical.
12 Q. Thank you.
13 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I seek to tender into
14 evidence the -- the Rule 92 ter statements of this witness, if that's
15 necessary. I don't know if you propose to give them separate exhibit
16 numbers, or whether under the terms of your order that you made it simply
17 becomes part of the trial -- trial evidence. And I don't know whether
18 you want to give the testimonies and statements that we hope to be
19 adducing today and in the future separate exhibit numbers, P whatever.
20 If it ...
21 [Trial Chamber confers]
22 JUDGE HARHOFF: We would prefer to have them admitted as
24 MR. DI FAZIO: Certainly. If that's the case, then I ask that
25 the two transcripts from the 16th and 17th of June, 2003, be admitted
1 into evidence.
2 THE REGISTRAR: If the counsel could kindly refer to the 65 ter
4 MR. DI FAZIO: Sorry. My apologies for that. The 65 ter number
5 is 10004.
6 THE REGISTRAR: Will become Exhibit P34 under seal, Your Honours.
7 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, it was my understanding that the
8 instruction from the Trial Chamber was that a part that -- parts of the
9 statement or the transcripts which the Prosecution intends to rely on
10 would be highlighted in -- in the documents in order to avoid the -- the
11 enormous amount of material. That was my understanding of the principle
12 that we were going to use in this case.
13 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm just checking now as we -- if Your Honours
14 would give me a moment to see that the -- yes. I see yellow on the
15 exhibit. Yes, it's marked. The electronic file's marked.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you very much.
17 MR. DI FAZIO: It will have the yellow and the blue.
18 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you. I just needed this clarification.
19 Thank you.
20 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you, Mr. Zecevic.
21 We noted that it was marked.
22 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you.
23 Q. Witness, I just want to seek some clarification about various
24 aspects of the testimony that you provided back in 2003. You provided a
25 lot of evidence about events in your municipality, but I want you to turn
1 your mind to events in June of 1992, and in fact, the period of time soon
2 after Bajram in June of 1992. In your evidence you describe some attacks
3 on villages around Kotor Varos, and you describe the movements of
4 villagers who were congregating at various locations in other villages,
5 and you describe your own movements.
6 Eventually you describe going to a place called Plitska, and
7 eventually from Plitska going off to negotiate with Serb forces. And you
8 say that you went with two other gentlemen whose name I don't need to
9 mention now. And you describe being stopped by policemen wearing blue
11 Can you remember how many policemen stopped you?
12 A. At the bridge of the Bosanka River
13 young men. Some of them were in blue uniforms of the reserve police
14 forces in Yugoslavia
15 were in camouflage uniforms. It was a group of five to seven young men.
16 I can't really say the exact number. Of course I knew all of those young
17 men because these were all people from the neighbourhood. The last names
18 were Djuric, Krezovic, Tepic
19 men. Some of them were in reserve police uniforms and some were in
20 camouflage uniforms or partially camouflage and partially civilian
22 Q. Thank you. Were the policemen who were dressed in blue uniforms,
23 were they armed?
24 A. They were armed.
25 Q. Thank you. And the other men who weren't in blue uniform, the
1 who were dressed this camouflage uniform or partially camouflage in
2 civilian clothing, can you tell us, if you know - and tell us if you
3 don't know - but can you tell us if you know if there were members of any
4 armed formation such as the police or the army?
5 A. They were armed. I don't know which formations they belonged to.
6 That's something I really cannot say with certainty. I assume that these
7 were people who belonged to units of the Territorial Defence.
8 Q. And what had been your intention as you approached these -- these
9 men who were armed and in uniform? What had you been hoping to achieve
10 by going down to this place?
11 A. I expected that was the intention, and my assignment was with two
12 companions who were accompanying me to set up -- or to establish contacts
13 with Mr. Slobodan Zupljanin and to possibly have talks and possibly agree
14 about the possibility of stopping any kind of combat actions and to find
15 some sort of solution about what to do with the population, how to take
16 the population out. The wish was to help people in some way and to
17 prevent further escalation of the conflict.
18 Q. Were you and your two companions armed?
19 A. No, we were not armed.
20 Q. Were you and your two companions members of the police or in any
21 armed group, members of an armed group?
22 A. We were not members of any military formation, neither of us.
23 Q. Thank you. In your testimony back in June of 2003, you further
24 describe being taken after your arrest to the Maslovare primary school.
25 Were your two companions also arrested and taken to the place? By that I
1 mean the two men who accompanied you down to -- to the point where you --
2 where you were arrested.
3 A. They were with me as far as a catering facility in the centre of
4 Vrbanjci where we met Mr. Zupljanin, Slobodan Zupljanin. His nickname
5 was Bebac. Of course then they were separated from me in this cafe.
6 That's where they were separated from me, and I was taken in a civilian
7 van with some other people who had been brought there to the primary
8 school in Maslovare.
9 Q. What was the ethnicity of the people who were taken with you to
10 the primary school?
11 A. The group that was taken with me in that van were all Muslims.
12 In Maslovare, in the primary school we saw that there were some Croats
13 there as well.
14 Q. Okay. Now, you've described in your evidence that people
15 congregated and kept in a room at Maslovare, the primary school. What
16 was the ethnicity of those people? Were they all Croats, or were there
17 other ethnicities there as well?
18 A. Muslims and Croats were there, Muslims and Croats.
19 Q. Thank you. And when you were taken from the point of your
20 arrest, the place where you were arrested, the place where you saw those
21 men, those policemen in the blue uniform, to Maslovare Primary School
22 were you escorted?
23 A. Yes. There were soldiers in camouflage uniforms. Some of them
24 had white cross belts, and I assume that they were members of the
25 military police.
1 Q. Okay. So do I -- do I understand -- tell me if this is correct:
2 You were -- you were escorted from the point of arrest to the Maslovare
3 Primary School by soldiers. Is that correct? Not policemen.
4 A. Yes, soldiers, absolutely.
5 Q. Thanks. Do you know -- well, you testified in June of 2003 that
6 you know a gentleman maimed Savo Tepic. How long had you known that man
7 in 1992?
8 A. Mr. Savo Tepic and I have known each other from childhood. We
9 went to the same primary school. We were born in the same local commune.
10 Perhaps there's an age difference of three or four years between us. And
11 we also graduated in mechanical engineering, and we worked in the same
12 company. I worked there until the 11th of June, and before that
13 Mr. Tepic had taken on the post of the chief of police of Kotor Varos
14 after the local elections there -- or, rather, after the parliamentary
16 Q. Thank you. In your evidence you describe eventually being taken
17 from Maslovare Primary School to the police station. Perhaps before I
18 get to the police station I should ask you the manner in which you were
19 taken out of Maslovare Primary School. Was everyone in the room taken
20 away or just yourself or a selection of individuals?
21 A. I think that there was a period in the morning when we were
22 called out and taken out. Myself and a young man who was a Croat - his
23 name was Marijan Miskic, were taken out from the facility. There was a
24 vehicle waiting for us. I think it was a civilian and not a military
25 vehicle. And the two of us were taken with handcuffs from the Maslovare
1 Elementary School to the police station in Kotor Varos. Just the two of
2 us, myself and Mr. Marijan Miskic.
3 Q. Okay. And the other people who had been in the room with you,
4 they were left behind at Maslovare; correct or not?
5 A. Yes, they stayed at Maslovare.
6 Q. And who - tell us, if you know - who transported you or escorted
7 you from Maslovare to the police station?
8 A. I don't know the names of the people. In any case, these were
9 young men who were known to me. The only person whom I knew well from
10 before was Mr. Nebojsa Sebic. He was in a soldier's camouflage uniform,
11 and judging by the quality of the uniform and his conduct, he must have
12 been some sort of senior officer in the military formation that was
13 stationed at that school at that time.
14 Q. Thank you. Were there any policemen in the group or who escorted
15 you from Maslovare to the police station?
16 A. It was mostly soldiers. There was no one there from the civilian
17 police. I assume since one of the young men had white cross belts on and
18 a white belt that he was a member of the military police.
19 Q. Thank you. You testified about arriving at the police station.
20 The first night that you were at the police station, did you see
21 Savo Tepic?
22 A. Yes. In the corridor while it was still not known which room we
23 would be placed in on the floor, I did see Mr. Tepic in the corridor.
24 Q. Okay. Doing the best you can, was that when you first arrived
25 there or later in the evening? Can you recall? Later in the day?
1 A. Just when we came. We were still not placed anywhere. We were
2 still in the corridor.
3 Q. What -- what sort of condition were you in at the time that
4 Savo Tepic -- that you saw Savo Tepic?
5 A. I was in handcuffs in some sort of sorry state. I was afraid.
6 There was beating on the way. In any case, it was a very ugly picture.
7 Q. And what about your companion, the young Croatian man? What sort
8 of condition was he in?
9 A. Mr. Marijan Miskic was in even a worse state than myself. As he
10 was being brought in he was beaten, and he looked much worse than I did.
11 Q. Did either of you have any blood on your clothing or on your
13 A. The clothes were wet. There was nonstop rain in the course of
14 those few days, and they were dirty. We were quite a mess.
15 Q. All right. And from -- when you saw Mr. Tepic, can you tell us,
16 again doing the best you can, if he would have been in a position to see
17 you and your Croatian companion?
18 A. I sincerely hoped, giving my previous relationship with
19 Mr. Tepic, I secretly hoped for some protection, but it was my impression
20 that Mr. Tepic completely ignored us as if we didn't exist and as if he
21 did not see us.
22 Q. Thanks for that, but notwithstanding what you hoped for, just
23 tell us this: Was Mr. Tepic in a position to see you and your Croatian
25 A. Absolutely. It's a corridor. There were no other people there
1 save for those escorting us and the two of us. Certainly he could see
3 Q. Thank you. In your evidence you describe a couple of visits that
4 you made out of the prison that you were later kept in. One was to the
5 workers' university and the other one was to Banja Luka. I want to ask
6 you about the Banja Luka visit.
7 You described being taken out of the police station and taken to
8 Banja Luka, I think the next day after you were first taken to the police
9 station. Who took you from Kotor Varos to Banja Luka?
10 A. A civilian Golf car was used. The driver was a gentleman whom I
11 had known somewhat. I learned his first and last name only later. It
12 was Zdravko Samardzija. He wore a camouflage uniform with a camouflage
13 hat which resembled a cowboy hat.
14 Escorting us was Mr. Vlado Novakovic, a young man whom I had
15 known well previously. He wore a reserve police uniform, that is to say,
16 a blue one.
17 Q. Thanks. And about Mr. Samardzija. Can you tell the
18 Trial Chamber if he was a member of the police?
19 A. I met Mr. Samardzija then at that time. He took us to Banja Luka
20 and returned us back to the police station and to the prison in
21 Kotor Varos. We never met afterwards. I don't know what military
22 formation he belonged to, but in any case he wore the uniform I
23 described, a camouflage uniform with a camouflage hat resembling a cowboy
25 MR. DI FAZIO: Can the witness be shown 65 ter 2142, please.
1 Q. Do you recognise that building?
2 A. This building should be the police building in Banja Luka, in
3 Marsala Tita Street, across the road from the court in Banja Luka. On
4 the right-hand side of the picture there should be the school of
5 electrical engineering and the Ferhadija. I think Mr. Samardzic brought
6 us to this building.
7 Q. Is this a CSB
8 A. I must say that the acronym CSB
9 centre of security services. In any case, I don't know. It was a police
10 building. It had been a police building prior to the war in Banja Luka
11 I had never been in that building. This was the only occasion, and thank
12 God it was the last. I never visited the building before that, although
13 I do know that it was a police building. I suppose it was sort of a
14 central building for the police in Banja Luka. All other police stations
15 that I was aware of were far smaller and modest in appearance. I suppose
16 this would be the principal police building in Banja Luka.
17 Q. Thanks. You describe in your evidence being taken there and
18 suffering some light blows and threatening gestures.
19 Were you kept in the one place in the building, or were you taken
21 A. I was in only one room. In the room next door there was the
22 young man who was brought in with me, that is to say Marijan Miskic. We
23 were in separate rooms. In any case, I was in only one room. The only
24 times during which I left the room was to go to the toilet, and I was
25 always escorted.
1 Q. Thank you. In your evidence you describe later catching up with
2 Mr. Miskic and being taken back to -- back to Kotor Varos. And you
3 describe him having broken ribs. Had he -- did he have broken ribs
4 before he went to the police, to this place, or did he sustain those
5 injuries there?
6 A. I must say that in this building I was not physically mistreated.
7 In the room next door one could hear constant shouting, moaning, and
8 noise. He was frequently taken out to the toilet. When we met again, he
9 could not walk in a normal fashion. He did complain of pain in his ribs.
10 Even the gentleman who was bringing us back said something to the extent
11 that if he is in that much pain because of the ribs, he should be allowed
12 to see a doctor.
13 As a result of that beating, Mr. Miskic suffered a lot, because
14 for a long time after that, in the Kotor Varos building -- prison, he
15 could not move about. He was a young man who had previously been quite
16 fit, but once he returned, he spent a lot of time simply lying on the
17 ground since he could not move about.
18 Q. Okay. And just to finish up with this topic. Looking at that
19 photograph, is the room that you were taken to shown in the photograph
20 anywhere by any chance, or is it not visible?
21 A. I cannot go into such detail. I really don't know. I know that
22 we were taken up to a floor, but I don't know to which room.
23 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I seek to tender that
25 JUDGE HALL
1 in the series.
2 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P35, Your Honours.
3 MR. DI FAZIO:
4 Q. Right. In your evidence from June 2003, you describe at
5 considerable length your imprisonment until the 23rd of July, 1993
6 were kept in the same prison throughout that year?
7 A. Throughout that period I was in the same prison, until the
8 New Year's, I think, when we were transferred from the room number 3 to a
9 larger and better equipped room which was closer to the entrance.
10 Therefore, I did not move out of the prison. I was not transferred
12 Q. Thank you. What was the ethnicity of your fellow prisoners?
13 A. In the prison there were detainees of Muslim and Croat
15 Q. I'd like you to give the Trial Chamber an idea of what exactly
16 this building was. And let's start with its pre-war use. What had this
17 place been used for prior to the outbreak of war in Kotor Varos?
18 A. As a member of the reserve force of the JNA, I used to go to that
19 building to be issued with military equipment that was due to the
20 military -- to the reserve force. I know that that building used to be a
21 TO warehouse during the Yugoslav times.
22 Q. Had the building ever been used as part of the formal prison
23 system existing in Bosnia
24 A. I don't know whether anyone served their sentence in that prison
25 before that.
1 Q. How long had it been used for TO purposes prior to 1992?
2 A. I don't know how long. I do know that it was used. For example,
3 as I was serving my military term in the 1980s, it was used for that
4 purpose. I don't know whether it was used to that end prior to that
5 period. I never actually entered the building at that time.
6 Q. Thank you. Do you know a gentleman named Zdravko Pejic?
7 A. I had known Mr. Pejic from earlier times. I think my first ID
8 when I turned 18 was issued to me in Kotor Varos by him. That's how I
9 know him as a police employee. He also appeared there during our time of
10 detention. He frequently visited the prison. I think he was a person
11 who had the authority to enter the prison at any time. He even issued
12 certain orders to those securing the prison.
13 During my stay in the prison, I frequently saw him.
14 Q. Was he a policeman during 1992 when you were in prison?
15 A. Mr. Zdravko Pejic usually arrived in a camouflage uniform, but it
16 was a blue camouflage uniform, not an SMB uniform. By that time one
17 could already see people in blue camouflage uniforms. This was a novelty
18 for us. We didn't even know such uniforms existed, because by that time
19 we had grown accustom to the SMB camouflage uniforms. It was my
20 presumption, therefore, that he was a police employee.
21 Q. Thanks. During the time that you were incarcerated, did you meet
22 or come to know a gentleman with the surname Zaric?
23 A. There was a young man who had been a policeman in Croatia
24 to the war there. That man also commanded the policemen in the early
25 period, in June and July, who were securing the prison. He commanded the
1 group of policemen who manned the gate.
2 JUDGE HARHOFF: Prosecutor, may I remind you that you have used
3 35 minutes as of this moment.
4 MR. DI FAZIO: Thank you. I regret my underestimate. I've just
5 about wrapped it up, though, so I'm hopeful in finishing in the next
6 minute or two. Thank you. Thank you for that, Your Honours.
7 Q. Finally, the last name I want to put to you is a gentleman
8 bearing the surname Krejic. Did you know anyone in 1992 whilst in prison
9 with the surname Krejic?
10 A. At a given time a group of prisoners was taken out for work.
11 These detainees were Croats, and one of them, I think his name was Sipura
12 escaped. It is then that the entire structure in the prison was
13 replaced. Therefore, this Krejic man whom I had known since before the
14 war, replaced Mr. Zaric as the commander of the police force securing the
16 Q. Thank you. My last question is this. Just moments ago you said
17 that -- talking about the man you knew as Mr. Zaric, that he commanded
18 the policemen in the early period in June and July who were securing the
19 prison. Did police secure the prison throughout your incarceration, or
20 is it just in that period of time?
21 A. Throughout my period of incarceration in the Kotor Varos prison,
22 it was the police who secured the prison. Of course they rotated.
23 Q. Thank you.
24 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I have no further
1 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you very much, Mr. Prosecutor. And we will
2 now, as I told you, pass the floor on to the two Defence teams, and the
3 first counsel who is going to cross-examine you will be Mr. Zecevic, who
4 is representing the accused Mico Stanisic, and Mr. Zecevic has asked for
5 40 minutes for his cross-examination of you, and we will grant him that.
6 Thereafter, Mr. Pantelic, who is representing the other accused,
7 Mr. Stojan Zupljanin, will proceed with his cross-examination, and
8 Mr. Pantelic has asked for one hour, and we will give him that.
9 After the cross-examination of the two Defence teams, we might
10 ask the Prosecution if they have any short re-examination questions to
11 put to you, and when they have completed their questions maybe the Judges
12 on the bench will have some extra questions for you, and that will then
13 conclude your testimony for today.
14 I give the floor to Mr. Zecevic with -- and 40 minutes to
15 complete his cross-examination.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you, Your Honours.
17 Cross-examination by Mr. Zecevic:
18 Q. [Interpretation] Good morning, sir. In your statement, you say
19 that Kotor Varos, prior to the war, was a poor and -- poorly developed
20 municipality in Bosnia
21 A. That is correct.
22 Q. The association of municipalities of Bosanska Krajina was formed
23 back in the 1980s.
24 A. I'm not aware of that fact.
25 Q. The municipality -- the association of municipalities of the
1 Bosanska Krajina, including Kotor Varos, was formed prior to 1990.
2 A. I don't know about that.
3 Q. Thank you. You acted as vice-president of the SDA in
4 Kotor Varos. All different ethnic political parties were represented in
5 that municipality.
6 A. Yes, all three of them.
7 Q. Do you know when the Croatian Community of Herceg-Bosna was
9 A. I don't know a precise date of its formation.
10 Q. What about a year? 1990, 1991?
11 A. I must say that I don't know it precisely.
12 Q. Thank you. Do you know when the HVO was formed, the Croatian
13 Defence Council?
14 A. I don't know precisely. I don't know when the HVO was formed,
16 Q. The Croatian national party, the HDZ, had its own political
17 structure in Kotor Varos?
18 A. Yes, it did.
19 Q. You are aware that the HVO had units in the area of the
20 municipality of Kotor Varos at the latest by September 1991?
21 A. I am not aware of any HVO units, and I don't know whether -- I
22 don't know when they were formed.
23 Q. You are probably familiar with the fact that the Crisis Staff of
24 the HDZ was formed as early as March 1992?
25 A. I don't know when the HDZ Crisis Staff was formed, but in my
1 previous testimony I had an opportunity to go through some of the minutes
2 of a body called like that. It was part of evidence.
3 Q. Would you agree with me that the Crisis Staff of the HDZ was
4 formed in early March 1992, or do you require to see a document?
5 A. You don't need to do that. I suppose such a body was
6 functioning, and since I did see some of their minutes, I -- as evidence,
7 I suppose that is correct.
8 Q. When did the SDA establish its Crisis Staff?
9 A. I don't know what the date would be precisely. It involved
10 certain incidents and barricades along the main road. This in a way was
11 a reason to have a meeting at the municipal level of the party. I
12 presume it was in the spring of 1992.
13 Q. If I understand you correctly, as of spring 1992, both the HDZ
14 and the SDA had their respective Crisis Staffs in Kotor Varos?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. You know, don't you, that the HDZ initiate the erection of
17 barricades in February and early March in Kotor Varos?
18 A. I know of the barricades. They came about as a result of an
19 incident, that is to say, a wounding.
20 Q. Please just answer my question.
21 A. I don't know whether it was the HDZ who initiated that process.
22 Q. I'll show you a document.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: Can we have, please, 4002, 1D4002, on the e-court,
24 please. 4002.
25 Your Honours, I need your instructions. It has been uploaded and
1 released as far as we're concerned. We checked that with the
3 JUDGE HARHOFF: If you have a hard copy --
4 MR. ZECEVIC: I do.
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: -- then we can put it on the ELMO.
6 MR. ZECEVIC: Can we have the first page put on the ELMO, please.
7 The lower part. Thank you.
8 Q. [Interpretation] Sir, can you see the document? It bears the
9 date of the 6th of March. In the last paragraph a certain Janja Mandic
11 "We made a mistake concerning the barricades."
12 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Witness, can I just ask a question to
14 Since we don't read B/C/S very well, could you please explain to
15 us what this document is and where it comes from?
16 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, this is -- the document, of course,
17 has a translation that's -- I'm sorry, but this is a technical glitch.
18 This is a document -- this is the minutes of the HDZ Crisis Staff meeting
19 held on the 6th of March, 1992, where they're discussing the barricades
20 where they are -- which they erected, and they are saying that obviously
21 they made a mistake. I'm just trying to help witness -- witness's
22 recollection. If he knows, of course.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I tried to answer your question
24 about the barricades. I am not familiar with this document. I can only
25 be aware of such minutes if presented to me by the OTP or Defence.
1 This -- these are minutes of a group of Croats of whom I knew.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, just first a -- I was just informed
3 that the document is in e-court. Okay.
4 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, my question was this: Are you aware of
5 the fact that the HDZ and Croats erected barricades around the 5th of
6 March in Kotor Varos, yes or no?
7 A. I don't know who organised that. I do know, however, that there
8 were barricades.
9 Q. Thank you. In your statement you talk about the Patriotic League
10 and the Green Berets as illegal paramilitary organisations; is that
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. These were, so to say, the military factions of the SDA; is that
15 A. Do you mean in general or only in the territory of Kotor Varos
17 Q. Generally speaking.
18 A. Yes, they were.
19 Q. Do you know when these military factions or wings of the SDA were
21 A. I don't.
22 Q. 1991 perhaps?
23 A. I don't know.
24 Q. In the area of Kotor Varos, some say that over 1 million
25 German marks were spent for arms in the area of Vecici and Vrbanjci in
1 early 1992. Do you agree with that?
2 A. I don't know anything about that money. I'm not aware that such
3 a high sum of money was spent for arms.
4 Q. You know Sadikovic, don't you?
5 A. I know Mr. Sadikovic as of the time when the SDA was being formed
6 in the municipality. He was also assigned a position in the party.
7 Q. When you say "position," do you mean his tasks in the
8 organisation and arming of Muslims in the municipality?
9 A. No, absolutely not. I have in mind his position as the deputy
10 commander of the police in the Kotor Varos police station.
11 Q. Isn't it true that you disagreed with Mr. Sadikovic on the issue
12 of creation of the Muslim TO and the arming and organising of the Muslims
13 living in Kotor Varos Municipality
14 A. I did not know him well before that time. Given the fact that
15 our party could appoint a leading person in the police as a result of the
16 elections, then that position being commander or deputy commander, it was
17 given to Mr. Sadikovic.
18 Q. I pray you -- you know we are limited in terms of time, please
19 answer my question. Is it correct that within the SDA you and
20 Mr. Sadikovic had diverging views on the issue of organising, arming, and
21 establishing a Muslim TO as well as its illegal process of arming? Yes
22 or no?
23 A. There were certain things that we disagreed on.
24 Q. Thank you. After you were detained, you were interrogated by the
25 State Security Service as a suspect, someone who allegedly took part in
1 an armed rebellion; is that correct?
2 A. Yes.
3 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, 33, 11, it's "armed rebellion," not
4 "around rebellion."
5 Q. [Interpretation] You recall having given at least two statements
6 to the State Security Service, don't you?
7 A. Yes, I do.
8 MR. ZECEVIC: Could we have Exhibit 1D3994 on the e-court.
9 Your Honours, I'm sorry I missed -- because of the technical
10 glitch, I missed the previous document to be asked to be admitted as an
11 exhibit, the previous document which we found eventually on the ...
12 [Trial Chamber confers]
13 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, I'm -- just --
14 JUDGE HALL
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 JUDGE HALL
18 should be admitted. Our reservation is based on the fact that the
19 witness, whereas he has alluded to it, he can't speak directly about the
20 contents of the document. He wasn't the -- it is something that puts a
21 bit of a context to what he's saying, what it is -- he is neither the
22 maker nor he is -- you get what I'm saying. But we do understand the
23 relevance, and it is for that limited reason that we agree that it should
24 be admitted as an exhibit. But the documents such as this in the future,
25 we would respectfully remind you to -- that they wouldn't -- that they
1 can't be admitted as of right, as it were.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: I understand and I appreciate, Your Honour.
3 Your Honours, I have a problem with the -- with the next two documents
4 because they are not redacted, and the witness's name appear on them. So
5 I would like your instruction --
6 MR. DI FAZIO: And it also appears on this particular document as
7 well, on the English translation.
8 JUDGE HARHOFF: Which document, the one --
9 MR. DI FAZIO: The one that was just admitted.
10 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
11 MR. DI FAZIO: So I don't know. I think redactions might be
13 JUDGE HARHOFF: If the witness's name appeared on the last
14 document, it needs to be admitted under seal.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: It doesn't.
16 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D1 under seal, Your Honours.
17 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Prosecutor, did or did not the name appear?
18 MR. DI FAZIO: I understood that it might have been -- the
19 document might have had a camera on it and the name might have gone out
20 to the wider public. I'm informed by my colleagues.
21 Would Your Honours just give me a moment, please.
22 [Prosecution counsel confer]
23 MR. ZECEVIC: I'm also sorry, Your Honours. I believe we've
24 already introduced some documents. I'm pretty sure with it, so this
25 cannot be 1D1.
1 MR. DI FAZIO: No, the previous document, there was not a name.
2 I made a mistake; I apologise. It's on the current document that the
3 name appears.
4 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.
5 THE REGISTRAR: My apologies, Your Honours, the document is
6 indeed 1D6, and it should not be under seal.
7 MR. ZECEVIC: Okay. Can we go into the private session so I can
8 present these redacted statements to the witness.
9 JUDGE HARHOFF: I'm being told that we need not go into private
10 session, but what we can do is that we can make sure that the documents
11 are not exhibited to the public or shown to the public. So we can stay
12 where we are in open session, but we will prevent documents from being --
13 MR. ZECEVIC: Okay.
14 JUDGE HARHOFF: -- transmitted.
15 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you very much. Can the witness please be
16 shown document 3994.
17 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
18 MR. ZECEVIC: Sorry. Can the witness be shown the last page with
19 his signature, please.
20 Q. [Interpretation] Sir, is this your statement?
21 A. I would like to read it in its entirety, if possible.
22 Q. Absolutely.
23 MR. ZECEVIC: If Your Honours would like me to provide the -- the
24 hard copy, maybe it's easier for the witness to ...
25 Your Honours, I hope this is not affecting my time. I'm really
1 sorry, but there is nothing I can do about it.
2 Q. [Interpretation] The question was: Do you recognise this as your
4 A. Yes, that's the statement, and it contains the elements. I do
5 recall some details. Yes, this is my statement.
6 Q. Thank you. In your statement you talk about this conflict with
7 Sadikovic -- or, rather, the differences of opinion with Sadikovic, who
8 was in favour of arming and the forming of the TO, illegal arming, thus
9 which you were against. It's clear -- it was clear to you then that
10 something like that constitutes an armed rebellion, doesn't it not -- was
11 it not?
12 A. Yes, it was.
13 Q. And that is why you were of the opinion that this should not be
14 done, because this would provoke inter-ethnic or international conflicts
15 in that area?
16 A. Throughout the entire conflict, I wanted to seek ways to find a
17 peaceful solution or a solution by peaceful means.
18 Q. Thank you.
19 MR. ZECEVIC: I believe the statement witness has recognised as
20 his own, and I would move the Trial Chamber to admit it into evidence,
22 JUDGE HALL
23 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
24 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D7 under seal, Your Honours.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: Can the witness be shown the document 3990. It's
1 another of his statements, and I'm providing the hard copy to the witness
2 so he can refresh his memory. The document is in the e-court 3990.
3 Q. [Interpretation] Do you recognise this -- this statement as
4 yours? This is a supplement -- supplemental statement to the one we
5 looked at before of the 20th of June, 1992.
6 A. Yes, this is my statement, but if you permit me, I think that I
7 was interviewed only once in the sense of an investigation previously
8 in -- about the matters in that building in Banja Luka. I don't recall
9 giving a statement on two occasions.
10 Q. Can you please look at the signature. Is it your signature in
11 that statement?
12 A. Yes. This is my signature.
13 Q. So you are saying, this is my statement, this is my signature,
14 but I do not recall when I provided it," but you do allow for the
15 possibility that this is your statement.
16 A. Yes. Yes, I do.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours can I move the Trial Chamber to admit
18 this statement as he recognised his signature.
19 JUDGE HALL
20 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 1D8, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE HARHOFF: Counsel, would you be good enough to explain to
22 us what the evidence is that you wish us to extract from this document?
23 MR. ZECEVIC: Well, Your Honours, this is -- in these two
24 statements the witness is talking about -- about his disagreement with
25 Mr. Sadikovic in -- within the Party of Democratic Action in Kotor Varos
1 where Mr. Sadikovic and some other persons were organising the -- the
2 Muslim TO and illegal arming and organisation of the military
3 organisation, like basically an armed rebellion. And for the purposes of
4 this trial, I think it's very relevant since the witness was arrested
5 based on his alleged taking part in the armed rebellion and --
6 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.
7 THE REGISTRAR: Apologies, Your Honours. Exhibit 1D8 should be
8 under seal, I think.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes. Yes, under seal, please.
10 Q. [Interpretation] Sir, during the examination-in-chief by my
11 colleague the Prosecutor, on page 25, lines 5 to 7, you talked about
12 serving in the military and being in the JNA reserves.
13 A. Yes. I did serve the military term of duty, and I was in the
14 reserve forces of the Kotor Varos TO detachment.
15 Q. Territorial Defence as part of the --
16 A. Yugoslav People's Army.
17 Q. Thank you. Can you please tell me the equipment that you were
18 issued from the TO warehouse. Did you keep it at home?
19 A. No, I didn't keep the equipment at home. During the previous two
20 years I was more engaged on work duties, and I was not issued with
22 JUDGE HARHOFF: [Previous translation continues] ... take a break
23 now. It's 90 minutes, so we will adjourn -- in 20 minutes.
24 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, I have probably five minutes.
25 JUDGE HARHOFF: Registrar, how much time has counsel have left?
1 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
2 JUDGE HARHOFF: I've been told that you have five minutes left.
3 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
4 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: Sorry, there was a mistake. The Registrar is
7 MR. ZECEVIC: I believe, according to my calculation, at least
8 15 minutes.
9 [Trial Chamber and registrar confer]
10 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Zecevic, we will have the break now. The
11 Registrar informs me that you have ten minutes left.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: Okay.
13 JUDGE HARHOFF: But we might grant you an extra five minutes.
14 Thank you. We will adjourn and come back at five minutes past
15 half 12.00.
16 [The witness stands down]
17 --- Recess taken at 11.16 a.m.
18 --- On resuming at 11.40 a.m.
19 JUDGE HARHOFF: Could you please push the button, and also the
20 security officer.
21 And Mr. Zecevic, would you be helpful. Okay, thanks.
22 MR. ZECEVIC: Everything is coming down at the same moment,
23 Your Honours. I'm saying that everything is coming down at the same
24 moment, so there is no need for me to push another button.
25 JUDGE HARHOFF: It was just -- it was just to save time so that
1 the usher didn't have to do it.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
3 [The witness takes the stand]
4 JUDGE HALL
5 have a concern as to the amount of time you have left to complete your
6 cross-examination. According to our record-keeping, the 40 minutes that
7 you had indicated earlier that you would have required, that you have,
8 give or take, eight minutes that have remaining. Now, we appreciate that
9 our calculations may not have accounted for the procedural issues which
10 would have arisen, but how much more time do you now think that you would
12 MR. ZECEVIC: I said Your Honour -- I said to Your Honours,
13 probably you didn't understand me, that I would be able to finish in
14 five minutes. But I was just concerned because we gave -- we gave two
15 hours for the whole four witnesses, and that is why I'm concerned about
16 the time, because we might need to cross-examine another witness for a
17 longer period of time, and that is why I'm concerned if -- if procedural
18 matters are accounted against my time. That's -- that was the only thing
19 that I raised with the -- with the Registry. Thank you, Your Honours.
20 JUDGE HALL
21 MR. ZECEVIC: In terms of this witness five minutes more or less.
22 JUDGE HALL
23 MR. ZECEVIC: No, we don't have a problem with this witness. No,
24 no, I'm just -- I was just referring to the general requirement of two
25 hours which I requested, yes.
1 JUDGE HALL
2 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you, Your Honours.
3 Q. [Interpretation] Sir, before the break we talked about the fact
4 that you were in the reserve TO of the JNA and that you were not issued
5 with any equipment. When I said "equipment," I met a uniform. You were
6 not even issued a uniform, or were you?
7 A. I don't remember if I had a uniform at my apartment or not, but
8 just the uniform, no weapons.
9 Q. Right. Just the uniform. This is what I would like to know. If
10 you do not recall if you had one, do you know anyone who did have
11 uniforms issued to them which they kept at their home or not?
12 A. People who were going to the front in Croatia, who had responded
13 to the mobilisation, mostly did have uniforms.
14 Q. I'm speaking generally about the reserve forces, the JNA
15 reservists. I'm not talking about the 1990s, I'm generally speaking from
16 the time that you had completed your term of duty in the JNA armed forces
17 in the 1980s or 1980. After that you were transferred to the reserves
18 just like many others, and when you were transferred to the reserve
19 forces you should have been issued a uniform which you were supposed to
20 take home; is that right?
21 A. Yes, I was issued with a uniform from the reserve forces, but as
22 far as I can recall the last two years, because my work duties, I was
23 released from the TO unit, and I was supposed to return the uniform,
24 which is, I think, what I did sometime in 1989, perhaps, or 1988.
25 Q. Thank you. So we clarified this. This referred to you because
1 of the specific nature of your work duties, but the others had their
2 uniforms at home, didn't they?
3 A. Yes, they did.
4 Q. Can you please tell me, when you were arrested and when you
5 stayed in all of those places where you stayed, people were dressed in
6 different uniforms. You referred to camouflage uniforms, olive-grey
7 uniforms, reserve forces, olive-grey uniforms, a combination civilian
8 clothing and uniforms, camouflage uniforms that were blue, police
9 uniforms, some cowboy hats. What I'm trying to say is that during the
10 time that you were arrested and held in all of those places, people
11 appeared in all kinds of uniforms, didn't they?
12 A. On my way from Vrbanjci to Maslovare and on the way back to the
13 Kotor Varos police station, I did see people who were dressed in that
14 way, yes.
15 Q. If -- so you would agree with me that the uniforms people were
16 wearing did not indicate that they were members of a particular unit.
17 Would you agree with that?
18 A. Yes. I would not be able to say to which military formations
19 they belonged, absolutely.
20 Q. On page 27 of the transcript, lines 6 and 7, in response to a
21 question by the Prosecutor whether the police was securing that prison
22 where you were, which was actually a TO depot, you said that "during the
23 period that I spent in the Kotor Varos prison, it was the police that was
24 guarding that prison, and they rotated." But what you know, actually, is
25 that these were persons who were wearing some sort of police uniforms.
1 You don't actually know that they were police officers or policemen; is
2 that correct?
3 A. I know that they wore police uniforms, and the two persons
4 referred to by name, I knew that previously they worked in the police
5 station as policemen up until the incident. I am thinking of Mr. Krejic
6 and Mr. Zaric.
7 Q. But you do allow for the possibility that they were mobilised
8 into some military formation at that particular point in time?
9 A. Well, such a -- such a possibility does exist. I'm talking about
10 their uniforms and their previous duties.
11 Q. I have one more question. When we spoke about the uniforms that
12 the reservists of the TO and the JNA kept at home, the same applied to
13 the reserve policemen, did it not? They also kept their police uniforms,
14 the reserve police uniforms, at home, didn't they?
15 A. I don't know. I did not belong to such a formation.
16 Q. Thank you very much. I have no further questions for you.
17 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you very much.
18 No other exhibits. I was just checking out if I have something.
19 Thank you very much.
20 Your Honours, there is one matter which -- which we would need to
21 raise. Maybe it would be proper when the -- when the witness leaves,
22 because it's housekeeping matter. We just need to clarify something with
23 the exhibits from -- from previous cases. Is that okay, or do you want
24 me to raise it now?
25 JUDGE HALL
1 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, it does affect this witness, but it's matter
2 on the -- well, I can say. Basically the Prosecution tendered his
3 transcripts from the other cases. Now -- from Brdjanin case, I believe,
4 and there is a number of -- of exhibits in that -- in that transcript.
5 So does these exhibits become part of our exhibit list? If they are,
6 they have to have the numbers. I'm just wondering what is the situation
7 about that.
8 Thank you.
9 [Trial Chamber confers]
10 [Trial Chamber and senior legal officer confer]
11 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Zecevic.
12 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, Your Honour.
13 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Zecevic, the Chamber issued an order
14 yesterday -- or a decision, sorry, in which we admitted into evidence the
15 transcripts of this witness's testimony in earlier cases, the case
16 against Brdjanin being one of them, in which this witness testified. In
17 doing so, we also admitted those exhibits that were tendered through this
18 witness at the Brdjanin trial and the other trials. That is to say those
19 exhibits which appears -- which appear on the Prosecution's 65 ter list,
20 again the idea being that we simply do not wish to admit anything that
21 has not appeared on the Prosecution's 65 ter list.
22 So that's the answer to your question. So those exhibits that
23 did appear on the Prosecution's 65 ter list and that were tendered
24 through this witness in his early testimonies in other cases have been
1 MR. ZECEVIC: But, Your Honours, with all due respect, how are we
2 going to refer to those exhibits? They should have exhibit number in
3 this case. We can't call them whatever, 1D375 from Brdjanin. They have
4 to have a number in this case.
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: Absolutely.
6 MR. ZECEVIC: But how are we going to deal with that? That was
7 the essence of my question.
8 JUDGE HARHOFF: Sorry.
9 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
10 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Hannis.
11 MR. HANNIS: Your Honour, I need to bring this to your attention,
12 because this -- this was an issue that was -- was discussed during some
13 of our pre-trial proceedings, and I frankly have to confess that I don't
14 know that it was ever completely clearly resolved. We had taken the
15 position that for those 92 ter witnesses, when there were prior
16 transcripts that made references to exhibits that were admitted or shown
17 to those witnesses in that testimony should be part of the 92 ter package
18 that you as the triers of fact would want to have in order to fully
19 understand their testimony without the necessity of giving each of those
20 separate exhibit numbers. And because we were taking that position, I
21 think for a lot of these 92 ter prior transcripts and prior statements
22 where perhaps specific exhibits had been discussed in the written
23 statements. They were shown, identified by an ERN, and discussed by the
24 witness. I think a large number of those are not on our 65 ter exhibit
25 list that was filed at the time we filed our pre-trial brief. Because we
1 viewed those sort of in the same way we view expert reports, that it's
2 included within that package so that you can have an understanding of the
4 I think Mr. Zecevic raises a good point. If we're going to have
5 those exhibits be in evidence in this case, they do get a number. And
6 you'll also need a key because Exhibit P113 in Brdjanin will be 65 ter
7 number 912 in this case, and we'll get a P number that's going to be
8 different than the Brdjanin number or the Krajisnik number or the
9 Milosevic number, whatever case the transcript comes from. And we would
10 like you to have those exhibits to put the testimony in context and read
12 Now, a number of the exhibits that are of particular importance
13 to us, of course, are on our 65 ter list and will be introduced
14 otherwise. But, frankly, I don't know how to deal that -- deal with
15 that, and I wanted to bring it to your attention.
16 [Trial Chamber confers]
17 [Trial Chamber and senior legal officer and
18 registrar confer]
19 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Hannis and Mr. Di Fazio --
20 MR. HANNIS: Yes, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE HARHOFF: -- and Counsels, let me be clear if I can about
22 the policy of admission of documents into evidence that we have chosen in
23 this trial. The policy is that documents outside the parties' 65 ter
24 lists are not admissible. In other words, we simply do not wish to deal
25 with documents that we cannot find in the parties' 65 ter list
2 Now, you have a great number of documents already in your 65 ter
3 list. If you wish to see other documents admitted into evidence, then
4 please move to have them included in your list. And when the comes to
5 the two Defence counsels, then the advice is the same for you. The
6 Chamber will not consider documents -- or admission of documents that are
7 not included in your 65 ter lists.
8 That's the first issue. The second issue about the numbering of
9 those exhibits that came in by our decision yesterday, we do not at this
10 moment have a full overview of exactly how many documents it was, so what
11 we propose to do, just for now, is to say that these exhibits that came
12 in through our decision yesterday will be given exhibit numbers, and that
13 the way we'll do it is that we'll have the transcripts given an exhibit
14 number, and then the adjacent documents that came in through the
15 witness's testimony in that transcript will then be given decimal
16 numbers, that is to say, exhibit number so-and-so, .1, .2, .3, and so on
17 so that we can find the relevant documents relating to the witness's
18 testimony as it appears in that particular transcript.
19 I think that's the smartest and the simplest way to go ahead. So
20 what we will do, we will ask the court officer to consult with the
21 parties after this hearing and then sort out the issue of numbering. And
22 maybe tomorrow or maybe on the next time we have a hearing, then we will
23 just use five minutes to read those exhibit numbers into the record.
24 So for now, Mr. Zecevic and Mr. Pantelic, if you would be good
25 enough to refer to the 65 ter numbers, the e-court numbers, for these
1 documents if you wish to use them now, but they don't have an exhibit
2 number yet, but they will be given exhibit numbers very soon. So until
3 they're given exhibit numbers, please just use the other e-court
4 numbering systems.
5 MR. ZECEVIC: But, Your Honours, just one -- just one -- one
6 thing. As I understood Mr. Hannis just two minutes ago, a number of
7 these exhibits which are admitted by your decision yesterday pertaining
8 to this witness and his testimony in the previous cases are not on the 65
9 ter list of the OTP. So therefore, how will they become exhibits in this
10 case if they're not on the 65 ter list? I mean, I think this is in a --
11 in a clear contradiction.
12 JUDGE HARHOFF: By asking the Chamber for leave to have them
13 admitted into their 65 ter list, and then we'll have a look at it, and
14 we'll decide whether or not they can be admitted into the 65 ter list and
15 from there into exhibits.
16 MR. ZECEVIC: Yeah. Okay. So first they have to ask to amend
17 their 65 ter list. And that brings me to another issue, I mean which is
18 very similar. This is the issue which we raised about the experts. The
19 expert reports contain the number of exhibits which are not on the 65 ter
21 JUDGE HARHOFF: May I suggest that we keep this discussion at a
22 later time when we can take some time off to deal with household
23 matters --
24 MR. ZECEVIC: I just wanted to --
25 JUDGE HARHOFF: -- and that we proceed with the witness for now.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you, Your Honour. I'm sorry, I just wanted
2 to put the Trial Chamber on notice. Thank you.
3 JUDGE HALL
4 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honours. Before I begin, I would
5 propose, if it's convenient for witness to have B/C/S version of his
6 previous statement to OTP so that we can go through particular parts if
8 So, Ms. Usher, please can I have your assistance.
9 JUDGE HALL
10 MR. DI FAZIO: These are the written -- written and signed
11 statements of the witness.
12 MR. PANTELIC: Yeah, yeah. We got it -- it's a B/C/S version
13 that we got from you in disclosure procedure, yes.
14 MR. DI FAZIO: I have no objection to prior statements being put
15 to the witness, but it seems to me that perhaps the -- Mr. Pantelic
16 should elicit whatever evidence he wants, and if he's got any problem
17 with the evidence he wants and then wants to make use of a prior
18 statement, that would be the normal procedure. Otherwise, in itself it
19 shouldn't be used at this stage. He should just cross-examine the
21 MR. PANTELIC: It's a matter just in case that witness needs some
22 refreshment of his memory for certain parts, that we shall not lost --
23 losing our time. That's the point.
24 MR. DI FAZIO: I appreciate that, and I'm always grateful to make
25 up time, but the witness hasn't been asked anything yet. We don't know
1 if he's got any memory problems, and if he does and it becomes necessary
2 for him to refer to his statement, that's the point at which it should be
3 produced, not at this stage.
4 [Trial Chamber confers]
5 JUDGE HALL
6 Prosecution's - and I mean no disrespect when I say - technical
7 objection. But for convenience we understand that it would be practical
8 for the witness to have the document now, but remember it is only being
9 used as the occasion arises as your questioning proceeds when you have
10 to -- whether he has to refresh his memory at a particular point.
11 MR. PANTELIC: Absolutely, Your Honour. That was my goal. Thank
12 you so much.
13 MR. DI FAZIO: I'm sorry, this is the one dated the --
14 October 1996 and May 1997. Thank you.
15 MR. PANTELIC: That's correct.
16 Cross-examination by Mr. Pantelic:
17 Q. [Interpretation] Good afternoon, Witness. My name is
18 Mr. Pantelic, attorney-at-law. I represent Mr. Zupljanin.
19 You have had previous experience with the testimony in this
20 court, therefore you know the procedure. When I put a question to you,
21 you should wait for a few moments before answering to assist the
22 interpreters, to have a precise transcript, and to have everything
23 conveyed. So I kindly ask you, just pause briefly before answering.
24 A. Certainly.
25 Q. Witness, you were one of the founders of the SDA in Kotor Varos;
1 is that correct?
2 A. Yes. Yes, I was. I was one of the founders of the SDA in
3 Kotor Varos.
4 Q. Well, it suffices to say yes or no at this stage. We can move
5 more quickly that way.
6 Mr. Muhamed Sadikovic was also one of the founders of the SDA in
7 Kotor Varos; is that correct?
8 A. Yes. Mr. Sadikovic was one of the founders of the SDA in
9 Kotor Varos.
10 Q. I kindly ask you again to say yes or no only. Do you know
11 Dr. Mirza Mujacic [phoen]from Prijedor?
12 A. Yes, I do know Mr. Mujacic.
13 Q. He was the president of the regional SDA board with its seat in
14 Prijedor; is that correct?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. You frequently met with Mr. Mujacic?
17 A. Not frequently. On several occasions.
18 Q. Prijedor is further away from Banja Luka than Kotor Varos is; is
19 that correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. What was the reason to have the seat for the Regional Board for
22 the entire Krajina in Prijedor rather -- rather than in Banja Luka
23 A. I'm not certain that the seat was in Prijedor. In any case,
24 meetings were frequently held in Prijedor.
25 Q. Mr. Muharem Krzic and Mr. Bajazit Jahic, were they also members
1 of the Regional Board of the SDA?
2 A. As for Bajazit Jahic, I am not certain; and I think Mr. Krzic
4 Q. Did you know that Mr. Muhamed Sadikovic was one of the authors of
5 a book called "To Testify to Crimes and Bosnian Patriotism"?
6 A. I have never read that book, but I have heard of its existence.
7 Q. Did you know that Mr. Muhamed Krzic was one of the authors of the
9 A. I do.
10 Q. If I tell you that in that book Mr. Sadikovic spoke in detail
11 about the preparations for armed conflicts in the territory of
12 Kotor Varos municipality, you would agree with me that that fact is true.
13 A. I am sorry, I fail to understand the question.
14 MR. PANTELIC: Maybe it's a matter of translation. I'll try to
15 be more succinct.
16 Q. [Interpretation] In that book Mr. Sadikovic speaks in detail
17 about the preparation for the arming of Muslim and Croat members in
18 Kotor Varos Municipality
19 A. I have not read the book, and I don't know what it's about.
20 Q. Did you discuss that with any friends of yours? Did you discuss
21 the contents of the book since you were a prominent member of that
23 A. I must say that several people whose names can be found in the
24 book were dissatisfied with seeing their names in the book at all. They
25 came to me to ask me for my opinion. I personally have no opinion about
1 the quality of that book. I never found it necessary to actually read
3 Q. Mr. Sadikovic was the commander of that military formation in
4 Kotor Varos Municipality
5 A. I learned of him being commander upon my release from prison.
6 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, it's not clear to me what
7 military formation we're talking about, unless I've missed something.
8 MR. PANTELIC:
9 Q. [Interpretation] We are talking about that Muslim unit in the
10 territory of Kotor Varos Municipality
11 MR. DI FAZIO: I've still got a problem with that. No problem
12 with the line of questioning, but it's just got to be absolutely clear.
13 Are we talking about a SDA Muslim unit? What precisely are we talking
14 about here, because it could be any nature of animal.
15 MR. PANTELIC: I will clarify that with the witness.
16 Q. [Interpretation] So, we are discussing a military unit with
17 Muslim members. This was not exclusively a party unit.
18 A. I understood, Counsel, and the party was not mentioned in the
19 context of the unit, and I don't think you attempted to allude at that --
20 to that.
21 Q. Precisely, Witness. Tell me, before your arrest, what was your
22 position per some organisational plan that you should have been assigned
23 to in that unit?
24 A. I must say that I was one of the few whose war experience and
25 work experience was unrelated to that. I belonged to no military
1 formation until the 11th of June, 1992.
2 Q. In your statement you say that you are well-versed in explosives
3 and mines; correct?
4 A. Yes. My JNA military service was in the field of engineering and
6 Q. As part of that training, sabotage personnel are also experts in
7 the field of mines and explosives; correct?
8 A. In the reserve force of the JNA in Kotor Varos Municipality
9 was assigned to a sabotage reconnaissance unit. My military -- based on
10 my military speciality from the JNA during my time of service.
11 Q. You are a reserve officer. I understand what you are talking
12 about, but we should have this explained for the transcript and the
14 The acronym VES, V-E-S, that means that you have been trained in
15 a certain military speciality; correct?
16 A. Yes. This is a JNA term.
17 Q. From your statement I can see that you're exceptionally versed in
18 the different types of weapons. For example, you discuss a Thompson
19 rifle on page 4, paragraph 2, of your statement. Next, a PAP or
20 semi-automatic rifle is mentioned as well as a light machine-gun, M-72,
21 which is found on page 7, paragraph 2, of your statement.
22 The same page, number 7, you mention PM-84, which is a heavy
23 machine-gun, in paragraph four. Sorry, page 8, paragraph 2, since there
24 are differences between the versions.
25 Next you mention mortars, recoilless guns, and artillery, on
1 page 10, paragraph 1.
2 Therefore, you have an exceptional knowledge about the types of
3 weapons. At least that is what I conclude.
4 A. I served my military term with the JNA, and I was decorated as an
5 exceptional serviceman, which at that time was a very highly valued
7 As for the structure and weapons of the JNA, this is something I
8 was well acquainted with as a soldier at that time.
9 Regarding the specific types of weapons, during the war in
11 municipality as war booty or through some other channels. It was mainly
12 reservists who sported such weapons which belonged to the arsenal of the
13 JNA and were of the Crvena Zastava make. I know that much, but I
14 wouldn't say that I'm exceptionally well-versed in weapons.
15 Q. Did you have information about a large quantity of explosives,
17 Bosnia-Herzegovina? There were some 15 tons of explosive seized on that
18 occasion. Do you have any knowledge about that?
19 A. At which border crossing?
20 Q. Brod.
21 A. I seem to recall something that was published in the media. This
22 seems to have been an incident and that explosives were being
23 transported. I don't know any more detail than that. This is what I
24 could learn from the media.
25 Q. You are familiar with the name of Miro Petrusic?
1 A. Yes. I know Mr. Miro Petrusic as an active-duty policeman in
2 Kotor Varos, although I'm not quite certain whether his first name is
3 Miro, if that is the policeman I have in mind.
4 Q. He was the secretary for All People's Defence at the level of
5 municipality and is a Croat by ethnicity.
6 A. I cannot picture the person in my mind.
7 Q. Did you know that Mr. Sadikovic, then Mr. Berbic, and
8 Mr. Petrusic participated in the procurement of weapons for the
9 aforementioned Muslim unit in the territory of the Kotor Varos
11 A. I did not.
12 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honours, may I call please a document which
13 is in e-court, 2D04-0019, please.
14 Could you be so kind, please, to show B/C/S version ERN
15 number 00423686. It's page 3 of B/C/S version of document. And English
16 version is page 6, please. It is bottom, number 27, Sadikovic Muhamed
17 and Berbic Sulejman.
18 Q. [Interpretation] It is a poor copy, but I suppose you can see
19 that in item 27 we find Muhamed Sadikovic, and in item 28
20 Sulejman Berbic; correct?
21 A. Yes.
22 MR. PANTELIC: Could we have first page, please, of this
23 document, both English and B/C/S version. Thank you.
24 Q. So you see that this is a criminal report dated the 27th of
25 October, 1993, submitted to the military prosecutor's office against
1 those persons specified below. Is that so?
2 A. Yes, it is.
3 Q. Did you ever talk to Mr. Sadikovic and Mr. Berbic concerning this
4 case, these proceedings?
5 A. Mr. Sadikovic and I are not on good terms. We have no
6 communication whatsoever.
7 As for Mr. Berbic, he works abroad, and I do not have an
8 opportunity to meet him.
9 If this is the person I have in mind, I believe proceedings were
10 instituted against him before the Banja Luka court.
11 Q. Thank you.
12 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, could we have exhibit number for this
13 document, please.
14 [Trial Chamber confers]
15 JUDGE HALL
16 witness saying about his connection with this document?
17 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. These two persons which are on
18 the list of criminal charges of the initial criminal proceedings are
19 known to this witness as a member of this military formation in the
20 region of Kotor Varos, and simply we would like to show that certain
21 judicial actions were taken against certain number of people, like
22 against him when he was initially brought to police station to give
23 statements and then going so-called pre-trial criminal proceedings,
24 simply to have this picture, yes.
25 JUDGE HALL
1 admissible through him?
2 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, my idea was just to identify these
3 two persons through -- through this witness and to have it admitted as a
4 clear picture about the events of which this witness is speaking.
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Pantelic, I share the Presiding Judge's
6 bewilderedness here. You are showing us a document that tells us that
7 criminal proceedings were brought against two members of a military unit
8 that was established within the SDA in 1992. What is the relevance of
9 this in relation to this witness and to your case?
10 MR. PANTELIC: The nexus and the relevance is because this
11 witness know, among other names, these two person that I ask him,
12 Mr. Sadikovic who was the commander of that unit, and Mr. Berbic, who was
13 a member. Simply to confirm this fact.
14 JUDGE HARHOFF: But the witness has already at several occasions
15 confirmed that he knew Mr. Sadikovic and that he confirmed that
16 Mr. Sadikovic was the head of the unit. So that has already been
17 established several times by the witness.
18 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. Another aspect of this exhibit
19 is that we want to show that certain judicial proceedings were launched
20 against the alleged perpetrators. For example, this witness was also a
21 part of this procedure during the cross-examination of my learned friend
22 when, too, his statement in police -- state security police were made.
23 So simply it is a part of an aspect of proceedings against certain
24 individuals in the region of Kotor Varos, simply as that.
25 [Trial Chamber confers]
1 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, the Prosecution's stance
2 is that there really hasn't been any relevant or probative value attached
3 to this document. Secondly, it deals with issues and crimes that had
4 occurred when this witness was already in custody. It's dealing with
5 matters that occurred in -- on the 25th of July, 24th of July, and after
6 that. He was already, on his own evidence, in the prison in Kotor Varos
7 by that stage. So how he can comment about -- on any of the material
8 contained in this is -- is completely unknown at this stage. The fact
9 that he knows or may know some of the people charged or mentioned in the
10 document doesn't make the document itself relevant. So unless there's
11 some clearer connection to an issue in this particular case, this
12 document shouldn't go in, at least not through this witness.
13 JUDGE HALL
14 that this document is not admissible, at least not through this witness.
15 MR. PANTELIC: Okay. Thank you, Your Honour. I'll proceed.
16 Can we go just for a while in private session, because I will
17 mention some persons.
18 JUDGE HALL
19 [Private session]
6 [Open session]
7 THE REGISTRAR: We're in open session, Your Honours.
8 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
9 Q. You talked about the situation in the Kotor Varos area, and you
10 said that the larger-scale conflict began around the 11th of June, 1992
11 Is that correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Did you personally know that some actions were being prepared
14 among the non-Serb population before the action on the 11th of June,
16 A. No, I didn't have any information about that. Here and there you
17 could see that something was going on, some sort of unusual movement or
18 night guard, guard shifts at the outskirts of the villages, but the
19 situation was more or less usual.
20 MR. PANTELIC: [Previous translation continues] ... 65 ter
21 document from that list 689.
22 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, on the left-hand side is the version in
23 the language that you can understand. At the bottom of the page under
24 paragraph 3 headed "The Situation on the Ground." Can you see that on
25 that page?
1 A. Yes. Yes, I can.
2 MR. PANTELIC: And please show the witness page number 2 of the
3 B/C/S version ERN number 00861575, please.
4 Q. [Interpretation] At the top of that page you can see that it says
5 that in the area there is intensive reconnaissance activity and attempts
6 at organising an uprising of the Muslim population outside the conflict
7 areas, particularly in the area of Bosanska Gradiska and Kotor Varos. Do
8 you see that?
9 A. Yes. Yes, I see it.
10 Q. Can you look at the bottom of that second page. And you can see
11 that the General Momir Talic, commander of the 1st Krajina Corps, is the
12 one who signed this document. Can you see that?
13 A. Yes, I can.
14 MR. PANTELIC: Show the witness, please, page 1 of this document
15 with the headings, please.
16 Q. [Interpretation] On the top left-hand side you can see that the
17 document was drafted on the 8th of June, 1992. Is that correct?
18 A. The 8th or the 10th. It says the 10th. Yes. It is -- that --
19 the date, the 8th of June, is typed, but then there is a correction
20 underneath that, stating that it was the 10th of June.
21 Q. So you would agree with me that an uprising was being prepared in
22 the Kotor Varos area by your compatriots. Isn't that correct?
23 A. If you permit, Your Honours, this is a report of the command of
24 the Krajina Corps, and this is their assessment.
25 I can say that the situation was very confusing in that period,
1 and you can conclude by what I say that for a while, since the spring,
2 there were some disruptions and regular life was disrupted. Some
3 companies were not working. People were not going for their regular
4 leave. There was fear, insecurity, the constant presence of military
5 formations that were leaving for Croatia
6 made on the basis of some assessments, but it's a document by the corps
7 commander. I cannot deny what is stated in the document.
8 MR. PANTELIC: Can we have exhibit number for this document,
9 Your Honour?
10 JUDGE HALL
11 document you attempted to exhibit. The -- is this -- is he -- was he a
12 part of the -- is it his document? Was he a part of the command, for
13 want of a better expression, that would have produced this? Could you --
14 MR. PANTELIC: Obviously not, Your Honour, but simply this is
15 information that this witness knows about the events, from his knowledge,
16 of course, in territory of Kotor Varos about the armaments and
17 operations. Simply that, which is confirmed by this document.
18 JUDGE HALL
19 discussion, the witness's testimony as to his knowledge, his experience,
20 is what is clearly receivable. That there are documents in existence
21 which -- the background or contents of which he is familiar does not,
22 without more, make the document admissible as an item of evidence. And
23 I'm asking you to indicate to us why in this case it is your submission
24 that this document is admissible as an exhibit.
25 For myself, I don't see it immediately, but you may be able to
1 persuade us.
2 MR. PANTELIC: Clearly -- just a moment.
3 [Defence counsel confer]
4 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, first of all, in accordance with your
5 guidelines, hearsay is admissible as far as I know. So he just confirm
6 the situation which was actually occurred in the territory of
7 Kotor Varos. And in addition to that, this document clearly confronts
8 certain portion of witness testimony. First of all, he is saying here
9 that everything was more or less calm in the territory of municipality of
10 Kotor Varos, that certain occasional incidents were -- broke out, but
11 this particular documents, as well as the future exhibits that Defence
12 will offer, clearly contradicts to certain portion of his statement.
13 Thank you.
14 [Trial Chamber confers]
15 JUDGE HALL
16 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes. If I may be of assistance.
17 JUDGE HALL
18 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honour, clearly this -- the hearsay is
19 admissible. The witness is giving weight to a hearsay document. Now --
20 I'm sorry. If we are to apply the standard as I understand the
21 Trial Chamber now to pursue, then we are going to have a huge problem
22 with the bar table admission of documents, because we will not have -- I
23 mean, that is the jurisprudence of this Tribunal, that the bar table
24 documents are admitted, but the bar table documents are not -- are not
25 introduced through a witness, just bar table documents.
1 Now, if we have -- if we have this standard, I'm really getting
2 concerned about the bar table admission. I mean, I was just trying to
3 raise this point also so you have that in view during the deliberations.
4 Thank you very much. I'm sorry.
5 JUDGE HALL
6 admissibility, but our concern is at the end of the exercise a management
7 problem of allowing in a large volume of paper which may at the end of
8 the day not, in fact, be relevant. So we have to take these --
9 unfortunately -- I shouldn't say unfortunately. We can only deal with
10 these questions as they arise, one at a time. There's no other way of
11 dealing with it. And the immediate problem is that we don't see how this
13 Does the Prosecution have a view.
14 MR. ZECEVIC: Thank you.
15 MR. DI FAZIO: Yes. I mean the issue of the authenticity of the
16 document and the relevance or probative value of the documents are also
17 considerations that you should take into account in deciding this
19 There's not much evidence at all from this witness - and I don't
20 expect there would be - concerning the actual authenticity of the
21 document. And so far the questioning hasn't revealed any high level of
22 any probative value of this document insofar as this witness is
23 concerned. He can't add anything to it or shed any light on its contents
24 that enhance your understanding of his evidence.
25 Perhaps a solution would be to have it marked for identification,
1 and if the Defence want to deal with the -- try and tender the document
2 at a later stage after more evidence has been adduced in the case or
3 perhaps through another witness, then that might save their position and
4 also mean that the decision is deferred.
5 [Trial Chamber confers]
6 JUDGE HALL
7 to attacks in the area, for that limited purpose it appears -- there
8 appears to be some nexus, so we will admit this document, and it may be
9 marked as an exhibit.
10 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit 2D1 -- yes, that's correct --
11 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you.
12 THE REGISTRAR: -- Exhibit 2D1, Your Honours.
13 MR. PANTELIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. Witness, sir, you are an expert for military engineering. Can
15 you please tell me the village of Vecici
16 what sort of fortification facilities were built by your compatriots
18 A. In the context of what event? What event does this question
19 refer to?
20 I apologise. I will answer gladly.
21 Q. In the context of the conflict with Serbian forces in the
22 territory of the Kotor Varos Municipality
23 A. I apologise again, but do you have a specific date? Is it --
24 because before the 11th of June, there were no fortifications or
25 barriers, only in the event of some incidents there were some improvised
1 barricades made of fallen trees on the Kotor Varos-Banja Luka road.
2 Q. And in the village itself, were there any armoured reinforced
3 cement bunkers or anything like that? Just say yes or no if you know.
4 A. No. I don't know about that, no.
5 Q. You are familiar with the events when two -- when
6 Milan Stevilovic, a colonel, and a high-ranking police official from the
7 Banja Luka CSB
8 A. Yes. Of course I received this information and I heard this
9 story, but I was in prison at that time. I was already in prison at that
11 Q. What did you hear? Who was the perpetrator of this ambush?
12 A. A group of young men carried out this ambush on the
13 Vrbanjci-Kotor Varos road in the Rujevica hamlet. This is where this
14 tragedy occurred, and several people were killed.
15 Q. These young men, they were Muslims, weren't they?
16 A. I don't know who they were. Most probably, yes, because in that
17 period Croats and Bosniaks were on good terms, and it could be that the
18 group was made up both of Muslims and Croats.
19 Q. And in one part of the statement you provided to the Prosecutor
20 you say that the resistance in the village of Vecici
21 five months. Do you recall stating that?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. It was quite strong resistance, I guess, and I assume that there
24 were plenty of weapons there as well.
25 A. Unfortunately, the events relating to the Vecici hamlet are of a
1 tragic nature. After their attempt to get out via Travnik, a large
2 number of people are still being considered as missing, and there is no
3 logic to thinking that they had lots of weapons.
4 Q. I have to interrupt you. All I asked was that since the
5 resistance lasted for four to five months and since you or reserve
6 officer and familiar with military science, how can resistance be
7 sustained for a period of four to five months if there aren't
8 considerable weapons? Isn't that illogical?
9 A. You can sustain it in two ways, that the persons who are putting
10 up the resistance are strong and that the persons who are carrying out
11 the attacks are weak.
12 Q. All right. Let us proceed. If I were to read to you the
13 statement given by Mr. Sadikovic --
14 JUDGE HALL
15 please. We are going to take a break. I just want to indicate to you
16 how much time you have left.
17 MR. PANTELIC: Your Honour, maximum --
18 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
19 MR. PANTELIC: Maximum number 15 minutes, but I'll do my best to
20 even make less. Thank you.
21 JUDGE HALL
22 [The witness stands down]
23 --- Recess taken at 12.58 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 1.17 p.m.
25 [The witness takes the stand]
1 MR. PANTELIC: Can I proceed?
2 JUDGE HALL
3 MR. PANTELIC: Thank you, Your Honour.
4 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could we kindly ask that
5 we wait until all background noise in the courtroom ceases. Thank you.
6 Could Mr. Pantelic please repeat his question. Thank you.
7 JUDGE HALL
8 to repeat your question because the noise of the blinds interrupted you.
10 MR. PANTELIC: I do apologise, Your Honour.
11 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, if I read out Mr. Sadikovic's
12 statement, who, as you confirmed, was the commander of the unit in the
13 territory of Kotor Varos, which he gave on the 25th of June, 2003
14 Brdjanin case, where you also testified, concerning weapons ... I'll read
15 in English since the official transcript is in English.
16 "At that time we had automatic weapons, the members of the
17 reserve force, for instance, had them, and they in part joined the
18 resistance and we also had hunting weapons because we had our hunting
19 society in Kotor Varos. There was quite a number of hunters, and people
20 made their weapons, they would take some pipings, pipes or tubes and make
21 something -- some sort of single-barrelled rifles or pistols with some
22 makeshift -- a certain number of our men had worked in Croatia
24 they brought those back. So they made those devices. Or at times, they
25 had bought the original TNT
1 [phoen], hundred-gram packages and used them to make bombs..."
2 In addition, he said that:
3 "We didn't have any hand-held launchers, not in the beginning.
4 But we had zoljas, which is a smallish anti-armour device which is used
5 to act against armoured vehicles. We didn't have Osa's at that time.
6 They were larger, and later on we captured some of them, and we captured
7 more machine-guns, so that later on we had more machine-guns, but this
8 was later brought, a group of guys who were in Travnik brought these --
9 brought one also to Vecici. I heard that one also had me brought with
10 three or four charges, but later on, we captured mortars..."
11 [Interpretation] Sir, you were not privy to those events given
12 your circumstances, but there's no reason not for you to confirm what the
13 commander of that unit said before this Tribunal, is there?
14 A. A statement given under oath or before this Tribunal, for me, is
15 something that I cannot comment as such. There would be no logic in it.
16 Q. My question was rather simple. You agree with this statement,
17 don't you?
18 A. I do.
19 Q. Do you know where the village of Sedari
20 A. Yes. Unfortunately, I am very familiar with that village.
21 Q. Mostly Serbs resided there; correct?
22 A. Yes. It was an ethnically-pure village for the most part.
23 Q. That village was attacked by non-Serb forces, was it not?
24 A. I later learned that the village was attacked. I learned that
25 only after I was released from prison.
1 Q. Do you have any knowledge of what forces attacked it?
2 A. I have no precise information to that extent. As a person, I do
3 not like to recall the names of all these locations which went through
4 the worst. There is a number of such villages in Kotor Varos
5 Municipality. I don't like revisiting that. I wish that had never
6 happened. If I could ask for this Court's indulgence not to dwell on
8 Q. I understand you fully, and we won't pursue this matter much
9 further, but you heard of certain civilian casualties aged between 4 and
10 64 who were Serbs; correct?
11 A. Yes. As of the moment I returned to Kotor Varos and in the past
12 ten years, and by reading the media, as well as by talking to some of the
13 survivors from that village, I began hearing of the atrocities there and
14 the number of civilian victims, and I truly sympathise with them.
15 Q. I fully respect what you said. You were also a municipal deputy.
16 Therefore, you are acquainted with the decision-making mechanism in the
18 A. Yes, I was a deputy to the Municipal Assembly in Kotor Varos.
19 Q. If I read out to you that in the Brdjanin case, when asked about
20 the functioning of the Crisis Staff, Mr. Sadikovic said the following.
21 The question was:
22 "What happened with respect when the Assembly could not sit and
23 its functions were performed by a Crisis Staff. Could the Crisis Staff
24 issue direction to the police?
25 "A. Yes. In such instances, of course, the
1 Municipal Assembly ceased to function. The Crisis Staff assumes all its
2 duties, and the Crisis Staff has more jurisdiction, more competencies
3 over other bodies, that is, and it can have its say in army or police
4 matters too."
5 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, the problem with that
6 question is that it's not clear at all, firstly, what's being put to this
7 man who is sitting here in front of you; and, secondly, what Crisis Staff
8 was the witness in the other case talking about? That's not clear to me.
9 He is talking about a theoretical situation, talking about a SDA Crisis
10 Staff or a Serb Crisis Staff, Crisis Staff in Kotor Varos, or what? And
11 we should this sort of issue inject a lot more precision, in my
13 MR. PANTELIC: In my learned friend will be more patient, then he
14 will get the answer. So the question was designed to have answer, if
15 any, in theoretical terms. So it is not particular question regarding
16 Kotor Varos or anything else. It's simply question, answer, and opinion
17 of this witness because he is a member of municipal parliament, simply as
19 Thank you.
20 JUDGE HALL
21 last phrase you used about the witness giving his opinion. The -- but
22 that apart, how is the -- the general observations he has of assistance
23 to the Chamber?
24 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Your Honour. In fact, one witness before
25 this court in Brdjanin case, Mr. Sadikovic, who was also a political
1 figure, said certain things regarding the competence of Crisis Staff.
2 Mr. Witness is also a member of municipal municipality, so he is
3 a representative, and he should, theoretically, have his opinion
4 regarding the role and duty of Municipal Assembly in peacetime and
5 Crisis Staff in wartime, simply as that. So I just want to have his
6 opinion in very general and theoretical terms.
7 Thank you.
8 [Trial Chamber confers]
9 MR. DI FAZIO: But ...
10 Your Honours, I think I know where this issue is going. It's
11 going to be an inquiry of this witness of the theoretical powers of
12 Crisis Staffs to issue direction to police forces back in 1992. In fact,
13 I think that's what the commencement of the question was all about.
14 Now, if that's what Mr. Pantelic wants to raise with the witness,
15 then he can, and he should ask him directly.
16 Secondly, if Mr. Pantelic wants to adduce the evidence of
17 Mr. Sadikovic, of course he can at a later stage.
18 And thirdly, you have issued practice directions that
19 cross-examining -- the name of the witness -- when prior statements of a
20 witness given in another place, another session of evidence, counsel
21 should not mention the name of the witness, and that's a third matter of
23 The issue could simply be addressed by asking this witness if he
24 knows what the general position was with respect to Crisis Staffs issuing
25 directions to police back in 1992, if he's qualified, if he's qualified,
1 to comment on that.
2 JUDGE HALL
3 Mr. Pantelic, now that you have had the opportunity to have your
4 question phrased by Defence Counsel -- by Prosecuting Counsel, could you
5 ask the witness again? A, his competence to speak to what you're trying
6 to get to; and, B, then what is -- what he says about it. So there are
7 two questions.
8 MR. PANTELIC: Yes.
9 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, can you tell us whether you agree with
10 Mr. Sadikovic's statement in which he said that the Crisis Staff in
11 wartime situations was a body which had some rather wide competencies in
12 relation to the military and police. Do you agree with it or not?
13 A. As a deputy to the Assembly, I am aware of the fact that the
14 Assembly is the most senior legislative body at the municipal level, as
15 at other levels as well. The Crisis Staff formed by the municipality
16 cannot take over the powers and competence of the Assembly. It has to be
17 established by virtue of a decree or a document issued by the Assembly.
18 Hence I disagree with all of the statement.
19 In certain extraordinary circumstances a Crisis Staff can take
20 over the role of an Assembly if it is unable to meet, but only within the
21 purview of its own authority. This is a legal matter which was regulated
22 by the statute of the municipality, its rules of procedure, and certain
23 legislation which are at its disposal.
24 Q. When you testified before this Tribunal in the Brdjanin case,
25 when asked by Judge Janu, you spoke about the role of the young policeman
1 who I believe was the prison warden. You said the following:
2 "May I be allowed to say something. Because I feel it is my
3 duty. It has happened that the prison warden, that was a young man who
4 was a policeman, sometimes fire would be opened on him to gain access to
5 us, but he would then stand in front of some special formation and
6 protected us, that is, prevented them from entering the prison. They had
7 come to the prison in a very ill faith. And I do not wish you to think
8 bad about somebody only because he was a guard in a prison where I was
10 [Interpretation] Do you stand by your previous testimony today?
11 A. I apologise. What is your question?
12 Q. My question is do you still stand by the words you uttered in the
13 Brdjanin case?
14 A. I absolutely do. I established contact with that person in the
15 meantime, and I actually have regular contact with certain prison guards
16 in Kotor Varos. I live there. I meet those people. And with some of
17 them I'm even on friendly terms. The young man I referred to is
18 Mr. Zaric, aka Ziba. In any case, I stand fully by my previous
20 Q. Perhaps you might know this: Was there a detention unit in the
22 A. I was detained temporarily in the SUP building, only in an office
23 on the first floor. I don't know whether there was something in the
24 basement of the building. That building was not completed at that time.
25 I still don't think it was.
1 Under the existing regulation of Yugoslavia, one such building
2 needed to have a nuclear shelter, and that was supposed to be done.
3 Unfortunately, it never was.
4 Q. In any case, you will agree with me that in Kotor Varos there was
5 no official prison, no detention -- court detention unit or anything of
6 that nature?
7 A. The room in which I spent over a year in was precisely for that
8 purpose, but I must say that -- as I have said already, that it was
9 adapted to that purpose. Perhaps it had a different purpose prior to
11 Q. I fully understand, but my question was simple. Before 1992,
12 there was no court detention facility in Kotor Varos?
13 A. Definitely not.
14 Q. If you had been in a situation to be the commander or head of a
15 unit arresting Serbs, where would you have placed those people? Isn't it
16 logical that in the absence of a prison you use other facilities? Is
17 what I'm saying logical?
18 A. I am more than happy that I was never in a situation to have to
19 arrest anyone. I never even thought about such issues, not even today.
20 Q. But I'm just asking you this: If there is no official prison,
21 there's no room, so why not come up with another facility such as a TO
22 building, school buildings, factory buildings? This is what I'm asking
23 you. Does this make sense what I'm asking?
24 A. Your Honours, Defence Counsel, I understand fully, but, to me,
25 most of the things which took place at that time in that area were
1 illogical. Do not ask me what I would have done had some been arrested.
2 I can only thank God that I was never put in such a position to arrest
3 anyone. I don't know what would have been. I simply was not in such a
4 situation, and that would be my final answer.
5 Q. I fully understand, Witness, but my question was directed at you
6 as a technical person, an engineer who would presumably understand the
7 conditions, but let's move on to another topic.
8 Tell me this, would you agree with me that the following facts
9 emerged from your today's testimony: One, you are a well-trained
10 military officer with more than an average knowledge about weapons and
11 explosives. Yes or no?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Second fact: Much before the 11th of June, 1992, with a great
14 number of your compatriots and Croatian neighbours, you planned an armed
15 conflict with the Serbs in the municipality covered by Kotor Varos. Yes
16 or no?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Because of such circumstances, you were arrested, brought in.
19 You provided statements to the police, and a pre-trial proceedings were
20 instituted against you. Yes or no?
21 A. I fail to understand the question.
22 Q. It's a simple question, really. You were arrested. You gave
23 statements to the police because there was suspicion that you took part
24 in the organised resistance against the Serb population in Kotor Varos.
25 Yes or no?
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. If you had not been arrested and if you had been in
3 Commander Sadikovic's unit, would you have killed Serbs as a member of
4 that unit?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Would you have carried out sabotage incidents such as planting
7 explosive -- explosives which may have resulted in civilian casualties?
8 Yes or no?
9 A. No.
10 MR. HANNIS: I'm sorry to interrupt. This is not my witness, but
11 I had requested from your legal officers if I could have five minutes at
12 the end of the day to raise procedural matters concerning the next two
13 witnesses coming that I think we need resolved. He's already gone over
14 his time limit. I would ask if we could intervene.
15 MR. PANTELIC: Three minutes, Your Honours, not more.
16 Q. [Interpretation] Witness, which forces killed hundreds upon
17 hundreds of Serbs in Kotor Varos Municipality
18 A. No, I don't.
19 Q. Who roasted living Serbs in Kotor Varos Municipality
20 know that?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Who burned and levelled the Serb villages in the territory of
23 Kotor Varos Municipality
24 A. I don't.
25 MR. PANTELIC: No further questions for this witness. Thank you.
1 JUDGE HALL
3 MR. DI FAZIO: If Your Honours please, I know that the issue that
4 my colleague Mr. Hannis wants to raise with you is of the utmost
5 importance to the Prosecution. Could -- could I respectfully ask you to
6 deal with that before I proceed to any re-examination? It may be that --
7 it may be that there won't be any need for re-examination, but I would
8 ask that you allow Mr. Hannis the time to address you on that. It's a
9 matter of crucial importance.
10 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honours. Two matters. One regards
11 Witness ST-56 --
12 JUDGE HARHOFF: Is it in relation to this witness?
13 MR. HANNIS: No, not this witness.
14 JUDGE HARHOFF: In that case I suggest we take it the other way
15 around. I understood from your colleagues that your input now was in
16 relation to this witness.
17 MR. HANNIS: No.
18 MR. DI FAZIO: In that case if Your Honours please, I have no
20 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you.
21 Questioned by the Court:
22 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you very much.
23 Mr. Witness, I have just one issue that I would like to raise
24 with you. Because right in the beginning of your testimony today you
25 mentioned that you were on your way down to the river and that you
1 crossed the river on the bridge in order to establish contacts with a
2 gentleman who you named as Mr. Slobodan Zupljanin.
3 Now, who was that actually, and why did you wish to establish
4 contact with him?
5 A. Your Honour, for several reasons. First, I knew him personally.
6 He used to be a manager in a local company. I heard from some people
7 that he was in the command and that he was a person of authority. I
8 wanted to talk to him to try and discuss the grave situation in which
9 weapons were used and find a solution. That was my motive, none other.
10 Of course, there were refugees who had left their homes, and they
11 wanted someone, which happened to be me, to have that conversation so
12 that military activities would stop and that people would be allowed to
13 leave the area for certain other parts of the country.
14 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you. And what was the nature of the
15 authority which Mr. Slobodan Zupljanin held?
16 A. I didn't know at the time what his precise authority was, but I
17 do know that he was in charge of a regular TO unit in Kotor Varos
18 Municipality. It existed until the 11th of June, 1992. It was a reserve
19 JNA unit.
20 JUDGE HARHOFF: So just to make sure that the gentleman you were
21 seeking to establish contact with is different from one of the accused in
22 this trial, Mr. Stojan Zupljanin. Is that correct?
23 A. Yes, absolutely.
24 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you, that's all.
25 MR. ZECEVIC: Just one matter of the transcript, Your Honour.
1 It's page 78, 23. I believe the witness said he used "to be" a manager
2 in a local company, not "to have."
3 JUDGE HALL
4 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, Your Honour, please.
5 JUDGE HALL
6 the Tribunal, and you may now be released. Thank you.
7 [The witness withdrew]
8 JUDGE HALL
9 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honours. The first matter deals
10 with the next witness that we intend to call, who is ST-56. There was a
11 request for protective measures. In your decision, you indicated that
12 this witness would be given a pseudonym and that you found that it was
13 appropriate to have facial and voice distortion. But in the order, you
14 only ordered facial distortion. So we -- we needed to clarify whether or
15 not she was going to be permitted to have voice distortion as well,
16 because, as you know, it takes additional time to set that up
18 JUDGE HALL
19 MR. HANNIS: And she is requesting voice distortion.
20 JUDGE HALL
21 MR. HANNIS: Yes.
22 JUDGE HALL
23 is that she be afforded both facial and voice distortion.
24 MR. HANNIS: Thank you very much, Your Honour.
25 The second matter relates to the third witness to come, who is
1 ST-27, and there are two matters. Ms. Korner, I think, sent an e-mail
2 request to Ms. Featherstone yesterday or the day before concerning
3 changing the mode of testimony for him. He was originally proposed as a
4 viva voce witness. Upon further review of his transcript and other
5 matters, she proposed to change his mode of testimony to 92 ter, and it
6 would help in our planning and scheduling if we can know the
7 Trial Chamber's position on that. And related to that there's the issue
8 of protective measures for him. He had recently had protective measures
9 in the Brdjanin case. It's my understanding that the jurisprudence here
10 in the Trial Chamber that those protective measures remain in place to
11 future cases absent a specific finding.
12 He is also a witness in another case for which he has not
13 requested protective measures, and those have been removed for that case.
14 It's our position, however, absent a specific request to remove the
15 original protective measures from the Brdjanin case for this witness,
16 they remain in effect for this case, and we would request that be the
17 situation. He has indicated to us that he does want those previous
18 protective measures in this case. And we think there is precedent here
19 where witnesses have had protective measures in one case and not in
20 another because their specific security -- their specific security
21 concerns pertain often times to the individual accused, the present
22 location of the witness, the present location of friends and fans of the
23 accused in that case, etc. And we think under the circumstances that
24 absent a specific finding by you or the previous Trial Chambers that
25 those protective measures should remain in effect for ST-27 in this case.
1 Thank you.
2 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, first about the protective measures,
3 we -- we stated in our joint reply our position. We think that it's --
4 that it lacks any rationale, that the same witness has the protective
5 measures in one case, and in the other case he says, "I don't need the
6 protective measures."
7 I really don't think that the Prosecution and the witness should
8 be accommodated in that respect. That's the essence of our submission,
9 which is already filed.
10 The second thing, Your Honour, we believe the -- the changing of
11 the witness on such a short notice from viva voce to 92 ter creates --
12 creates a huge prejudice to the Defence. Basically according to the
13 rules which Your Honours -- instructions which Your Honours gave to us,
14 the viva voce witnesses would come, would testify, and his testimony and
15 the exhibits that are -- that he -- that are tendered through him becomes
16 a part of the record. Now we are preparing our cross-examination on the
17 basis of that.
18 Now in 24 hours before we are notified that the OTP wants to
19 change it to 92 ter, which means that his previous transcripts, previous
20 exhibits in other cases, and all that is coming in. We're simply not
21 prepared, and we can't be prepared for that. And I don't think that this
22 is the proper way to -- I mean, this is a short -- I know it is up to the
23 party to choose which way will they present their evidence and their
24 witnesses, but this such a short notice really creates a prejudice for
25 the Defence, and we will not be able to cross-examine the witness based
1 on the case that he's a 92 ter witness.
2 Thank you, Your Honours. That's all I had.
3 MR. PANTELIC: Yes, Mr. President. Just for the record that
4 Zupljanin Defence fully support the submission of Mr. Zecevic, and in
5 addition to that, please, we kindly beg you to exercise your authority
6 over the OTP in this absolutely unsustainable practice, because this is a
7 serious violation of the rights of the accused. Twenty-four hours before
8 the witness coming changing of the mode of testimony, simply unbearable.
9 Thank you so much, Your Honour.
10 JUDGE HALL
11 [Trial Chamber confers]
12 JUDGE HALL
13 Mr. Zecevic and Mr. Pantelic's objection?
14 MR. HANNIS: Yes. Thank you, Your Honour, if I may. Just for
15 clarity of the record, it's not 24 hours before the witness is coming
16 that the notice was given. Ms. Korner e-mailed the parties and
17 legal officer at 2.41 yesterday afternoon. So even if he were to come on
18 sometime tomorrow, it would be more like 44 hours. However, we have two
19 other witnesses before him scheduled now. Given the rate at which we
20 proceeded on the witness today, it may be that he won't come on until the
21 day after tomorrow. And I think allowing the Prosecution to make this
22 change does serve -- warrant interest of the Trial Chamber to have the
23 Prosecution's case to conclude sooner because it will take less time with
24 the 92 ter than with the viva voce witness thank you.
25 JUDGE HARHOFF: Well, the Trial Chamber certainly appreciates any
1 method adopted by counsel to shorten the actual court time involved in
2 these matters. But in this case we take Defence counsel at their word,
3 that they are prejudiced by the change of method proposed by the
4 Prosecution. So what we would respectfully suggest to the -- to the
5 Prosecution is that in -- in future cases when such a change is proposed
6 that a longer period of notice be given to the other side. But as I
7 said, the Chamber's appreciative of the attempts to shorten the actual
8 court time devoted to this. So in this case we -- the motion is -- the
9 application is refused.
10 MR. HANNIS: Thank you, Your Honour.
11 And on Ms. Korner's behalf, may I inquire if this witness were to
12 be rescheduled at a later date, might the Chamber's ruling be different?
13 If he were to come first thing next week.
14 [Trial Chamber confers]
15 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thanks, Mr. Hannis. As the Presiding Judge has
16 just said, the Chamber really wishes to encourage both parties to find
17 ways to shorten the trial time. And so changing the status of a witness
18 from viva voce to 92 ter is something that the Chamber is very happy to
19 see, and we will accommodate that wherever possible.
20 Now, in this case we just think that the notice was too short.
21 If, as you suggest you want to put off ST-27 to a later date and
22 then re-introduce him as a 65 -- as a 92 ter witness, that's fine, but
23 again we wouldn't gain any time because we would then lose the time that
24 we have for him now.
25 I am not aware of any witnesses that you have brought for Friday;
1 is that correct? Oh, do you have witnesses for Friday?
2 MS. PIDWELL: Perhaps I can be of assistance. The -- this
3 witness is scheduled to testify late tomorrow, if we get to him, and
5 JUDGE HARHOFF: And he's the only witness to testify Friday?
6 MS. PIDWELL: Yes. Depending on the length of time the first two
7 witnesses take tomorrow will depend whether we reach him or not tomorrow,
8 but he is the own scheduled -- he is the only one for the rest of the
10 JUDGE HARHOFF: But ahead of him we have -- yes, we have two
11 other witnesses.
12 MS. PIDWELL: There are two other witnesses ahead of him. And we
13 had an indication from the Defence as to how long they will take to
14 cross-examine the first witness informally today, but we don't have yet
15 an indication of how long they would take to cross-examine the second
17 JUDGE HARHOFF: I was just coming to that.
18 I think we will proceed as scheduled, namely to hear to -- now
19 he's here to hear him now, but hear him viva voce. The Prosecution, if I
20 recall well, has three hours. If you wish to shave some time off that,
21 you can do it. But I think in the end, it's the most practical thing to
22 keep him here and have him testify this time as viva voce.
23 I was just about to ask the Defence teams if they could be good
24 enough to indicate to us the time that they would wish to have for their
25 cross-examination of the next witnesses.
1 MR. ZECEVIC: Your Honours, we indicated to our colleagues, as
2 far as the Stanisic Defence is concerned, that we intend to cross-examine
3 the next two witnesses at 15 minutes each at the most. And the rest of
4 the time, which I -- which according to my calculation is one hour and
5 20 minutes for the -- for the ST-27.
6 JUDGE HARHOFF: One hour and 20 minutes?
7 MR. ZECEVIC: Yes, for ST-27. I think. I mean, depending how
8 long we will take between these two coming witnesses, because we said,
9 Your Honour, two hours altogether for four witnesses. That's roughly.
10 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Krkovic.
11 MR. Krkovic: [Interpretation] Your Honours, for the next witness
12 we planned some 20 minutes. For ST-27, we plan to use the rest of our
13 hour and a half. So an hour and 15 minutes or an hour and ten minutes as
15 [Trial Chamber confers]
16 JUDGE HARHOFF: Thank you to both of you.
17 Hold on one minute, please.
18 [Trial Chamber and senior legal officer confer]
19 JUDGE HARHOFF: Mr. Krkovic, can I just clarify with you that you
20 would wish to use 20 minutes for the next two witnesses? Is that
22 MR. Krkovic: Yes, Your Honour. You're right.
23 JUDGE HARHOFF: Very well. With a bit of luck, it looks in my
24 schedule as if we should be able to finish of VS -- ST, sorry, ST-27 by
25 the end of Friday. So I think that's the best way to proceed.
1 [Trial Chamber confers]
2 JUDGE DELVOIE: On the 22nd September, Prosecutor filed a motion
3 requesting that protective measures remain in place for ST-027.
4 Trial Chamber will ask ST-027 to explain the reasons for requesting
5 protective measures once he is in court.
6 On 25th of September, the Prosecution filed a motion for leave to
7 amend the exhibit list to add four documents related to the same witness.
8 The Defence jointly objected to this motion on the 28th of September.
9 Contrary to the Prosecution's submission, at the time the
10 Prosecution's exhibit list was filed on 8th of June, 2009, ST-27 did not
11 benefit from the protective measures of delayed disclosure of his
12 identity. Those protective measures were varied by the Appeals Chamber
13 in the decision of the 21st April, 2005, in Brdjanin, to permit immediate
14 disclosure of 27 -- ST-27's identity to Mico Stanisic.
15 The Prosecution acknowledged this in its filing of a corrigendum
16 to its pre-trial brief on the 22nd of June, 2009.
17 The Prosecution disclosed the documents to the Defence at that
18 time within the deadline set by the Pre-Trial Judge. However, the
19 Prosecution did not at that time seek to amend its exhibit list, but
20 instead waited more than three months until approximately a week prior to
21 the witness's testimony to do so.
22 The Prosecutor has offered no explanation for not seeking to
23 amend his exhibit list when it realised that the witness was no longer
24 entitled to delayed disclosure.
25 In the Trial Chamber's opinion, the Defence has not had adequate
1 notice of the Prosecution's intention to rely on these documents at
2 trial, and the Trial Chamber considers that the Prosecution has not shown
3 good cause for its request to amend the exhibit list at this point in
4 time. The Chamber is further not persuaded that the documents are of
5 sufficient importance to justify delayed inclusion on the exhibit list.
6 The motion is therefore denied.
7 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
8 JUDGE HALL
9 the remainder of the week, so I would now ask the Registrar to take the
10 adjournment until 9.00 tomorrow morning. Thank you.
11 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned
12 at 2.09 p.m.
13 the 1st day of October, 2009, at 9.00 a.m.